The Google-Microsoft patent war of words is continuing. Yesterday, Google (rightfully so, in my book) accused Apple, Microsoft, and Oracle partaking in an organised patent attack against Android, instead of competing on merit, claiming that they bought up Novell's and Nortel's patents solely to attack Android and its device makers. Microsoft struck back, claiming Google was offered to join in on the bids for the Novell patents, but rejected the offer. Google has now responded to this accusation - and to make matters even more confusing, Microsoft responded back. A public shouting match between two powerful parties? Count me in!

So, without a patent somebody can take my idea & execution procedure (unique in combination) but use their own logic (code) to the achieve the same. How will a copyright protect my idea & execution procedure?

Specially in the field of software, I would think it rare that anybody didn't think of the same execution at the same time. Part of the problem is that good execution is good execution and you're far from the only person to think of the same idea at the same time (only in very,very rare instances will the execution be truly novel).

It is highly also highly unlikely that your execution is all that original. It will build on previous art. What many are doing is looking at previous art and adding a widget which then makes the patent acceptable but not novel (anybody can go for previous art and add widgetX). Unless widgetX is truly innovative, that is BS patent (if widgetX were innovative why not patent that instead?)